What real world difference is there between engines?

[rabman5]

how many of the other Zs have you drove tho? My opinion is based upon having owned alot of performance cars. And as i said previously, there isnt much difference between the Z4 3.0 and a M3

I owned a 3.0 for three years. Owned my Z4M two years now. Both are/were daily drivers & very fine cars. I will say that there is more to it than straight line speed. The M handles totally different. I have never driven an E46 M3. i think the E46 is very different than a Z4 though.

I remember when I got my 2004 Z4 3.0. Someone told me it was comparable with the Z3M . I believed it for a while, but the Z3m did handle and brake better than the 3.0 Z4 :rofl: :rofl:

If you want to talk straight line speed, get any car with that 3.5 twin turbo. That was as close as you can get to the straight speed of the Z4M. Brilliant engine.

 

[Hunter]

I had a esprit 3.5 V8 twin turbo. Nothin like the M3. My 640 bhp was quicker than both but unusable day to day. (rock hard clutch that was so jerky and 12mpg) My 4.2 tvr cerbera crossed with my S2000 would probably be how the Z 3.0 feels

 

[Hunter]

On a track, i fully believe that the ZM would leave the 3 behind, but as a daily drive do you really notice that you get to 60 1/2 a second sooner or that when u turn into an apex at 90mph your more stable? I think your more likely to notice the harsher ride and the higher fuel bills !!!

 

[rabman5]

Everything you mention illustrates that there is a difference. Yes, there is a different feel to turning, braking and a harsher ride. The question is, 'is there a difference?' not ' is it worth it?'. Right Breaker? :lol: oke:

 

[Hunter]

You misunderstand me. I agree that there are differences and as a out and out racer the M is the better car. But if i wanted an out and out racer there are quicker cars to be had for the same money. I just think with the 3.0 you get the best of both worlds. Its a LITTLE less speed for a more comfotable and an easier car to drive...for alot less money. If speed and handling where your main goals from a car then a GTR, FQ Evo or Supra tt a would make more sence. A TVR Tamora is a awsome soft top but wouldnt have the reliability of your M. So you must have comprimised when you bought your M. I think the whole range of Zs are great. They look good and go well. Not just the M.

 

[Mr Whippy]

I'd have a Z4 M if I could afford it.

It'd likely not be much quicker at any point on most roads, but the feel and sensations would be worth it alone.

Fortunately BMW make these cars so that there is as much a qualitative benefit as much as a quantative one!

I'm happy enough with my 3.0i Z4 for performance, but just knowing an M exists and has that extra 2000rpm makes it never feel enough

Just drive your 3.0i to 6000rpm, and then imagine it keeps going for another 2000rpm

That alone justifies having one, all the other changes aside

 

[Hunter]

Lol, if you want high revs get a S2000, rev like a motorbike and reliability and build quality second to none. But thats not what its all about is it? LOL

 

[Kaide]

Lol, if you want high revs get a S2000, rev like a motorbike and reliability and build quality second to none. But thats not what its all about is it? LOL

:bmwvhonda: 'nuff said.

I got a 1998 Honda VTR1000F. I swear by the Honda reliability. Just remember to maintain.

 

[Mr Whippy]

Lol, if you want high revs get a S2000, rev like a motorbike and reliability and build quality second to none. But thats not what its all about is it? LOL

Sounds arse vs an S54 on full chat, and is a bit gutless in comparison.

I get the logic, but if you had one, you'd just say 'why wasn't it a 3.0 i6 revving to 8000rpm+, and then you realise the MZ4 is it

 

[rabman5]

You misunderstand me.... If speed and handling where your main goals from a car then a GTR, FQ Evo or Supra tt a would make more sence. A TVR Tamora is a awsome soft top but wouldnt have the reliability of your M. So you must have comprimised when you bought your M. I think the whole range of Zs are great. They look good and go well. Not just the M.

Ah, now I understand. I did compromise when I bought my car. Any of the cars you mentioned would have been a better choice. What was I thinking? :roll:

 

[Hunter]

Not better, just more of out and out speed...thats what you seem to want from a car. Again.....i think all the Zs do exactly what they are meant to do. The M is the sharpest but on a daily basis you have made compromises in your choise of an M over the other Zs to be able to enjoy the Extra proformance. Lets be honest, you never bought an M over the 3 because you thought the M would be more comfortable or easier to live with. You bought it because its faster and sharper ( easpecially on paper or on a Track) but in reality when driving in average road conditions ( streets and Motorways ) the extra proformance isnt much of a bonus, where as the more compliant ride and lower fuel bills are.

 

[GP20]

Sorry. I can't stand this anymore. It just irks me when people can't differentiate between fast and quick.

A car that takes 15 seconds to go from 0mph to 60mph and has a top speed of 160mph is faster than a car that takes 3 secs to go 0-60 and has a top speed of 155mph.

A car that takes 5 secs to go from 0-60 is quicker than a car that takes 5.1 secs to go from 0-60 under that condition.

The Z4 and the Z4M, with the speed governors intact, are equally fast because they both only go up to 155mph.

 

[Andrew D]

Sorry. I can't stand this anymore. It just irks me when people can't differentiate between fast and quick.

A car that takes 15 seconds to go from 0mph to 60mph and has a top speed of 160mph is faster than a car that takes 3 secs to go 0-60 and has a top speed of 155mph.

A car that takes 5 secs to go from 0-60 is quicker than a car that takes 5.1 secs to go from 0-60 under that condition.

The Z4 and the Z4M, with the speed governors intact, are equally fast because they both only go up to 155mph.

:scratchhead: Errrr.... I think I know what you mean, but fast and quick do actually mean the same thing. In a literal sense anyway.

Interesting topic we've got here, but really I think it's less of "is there a difference in the real world" and more of "is the difference worth it in the real world", and of course that's in the eye of the beholder.

This issue is one of those diminshing returns things; it's always been the case that, once you reach the level of competent sports cars, a little extra performance costs a lot of money. For example, a Carrera GT doesn't give you two-and-a-half times the performance of a 997 GT2.

So the answer to the question is really dependent on an individual's balance of priorities; do they prefer the warm feeling of good value performance (which I tend towards) or are they a power-hungry maniac? The former favours the 3.0, the latter a Z4M (if they can't find an Alpina ).

 

[Mr Whippy]

You bought it because its faster and sharper ( easpecially on paper or on a Track) but in reality when driving in average road conditions ( streets and Motorways ) the extra proformance isnt much of a bonus, where as the more compliant ride and lower fuel bills are.

Don't we all buy the biggest fastest silliest thing we can?

I actually think compliant rides and lower fuel bills are simply not on the radar on a fun sports car like the Z4 full stop. It's the logic that sees you buy an Audi TT instead, because it has better mpg and awd for winter.

An M car is hugely desireable, performance and downsides aside imho. You buy it to enjoy for aspects beyond it's pure performance figures.

Just sitting in it, and seeing that rev gauge run right round to 8000rpm! Mmmmmm

 

[Breaker]

I think the thing with me is that I can't really see if someone already owns a 3.0si what they are really gaining by swapping it for a Z4M apart from bigger running costs and the M badge?

If I was to be in the market to change my Z4, the last thing I would do is to buy an M version of the same car because it wouldn't really enhance what I do with the car day to day and it would just feel as though I hadn't changed cars!

I'm not saying I wouldn't get a more powerful car next because I wouldn't be able to use the extra performance on the road, I probably wouldn't be able to use it, but it wouldn't stop me buying an M3 or M6 for instance because it is different to my Z4.

Now, if I had never bought my Z4 3.0si and I was looking to buy a Z4 now, would I buy the M?

I probably would!! At the price they are now I'd be stupid not to! :wink:

Do I regret buying the 3.0si? No! There isn't a Z4M around that would leave me on the roads I drive on! :wink:

 

[GP20]

:scratchhead: Errrr.... I think I know what you mean, but fast and quick do actually mean the same thing. In a literal sense anyway.

No they don't mean the same thing. You can say a car that's travelling at a constant 250mph is fast. But it's not quick. Quick is used to describe accelerations, which involve time and change of speed.

 

[Hunter]

You bought it because its faster and sharper ( easpecially on paper or on a Track) but in reality when driving in average road conditions ( streets and Motorways ) the extra proformance isnt much of a bonus, where as the more compliant ride and lower fuel bills are.

Don't we all buy the biggest fastest silliest thing we can?

I actually think compliant rides and lower fuel bills are simply not on the radar on a fun sports car like the Z4 full stop. It's the logic that sees you buy an Audi TT instead, because it has better mpg and awd for winter.

An M car is hugely desireable, performance and downsides aside imho. You buy it to enjoy for aspects beyond it's pure performance figures.

Just sitting in it, and seeing that rev gauge run right round to 8000rpm! Mmmmmm

An Audi? not really mate because it was the looks of the Z i went for. I CHOSE the 3.0 because of all the reasons i have already stated. If i wanted nothing but Speed and handling i would of bought an exige or kept one of the other FAST cars i have owned. I made a choice based on what i thought was the best all round car ( in Z form ) that suited my needs and decided it was the 3.0 as it has ALMOST the same proformance as the M without all the drawbacks. I think the M is a fab car, but for me to drive day to day and to work twice a month ( 450 mile trips on a regular basis ) the 3.0 IS the SUPERIOR machine. It is tourquier lower down making it more tractible, and driving on public roads it has all the overtaking abilities of the M. Granted the M has more kudos with those that own Zs but im not really a car snob and wouldnt have one just to impress others. ( i would of had one if it was the car that suited my requirements though). Good on you for those of you that bought the M cos you go to the Track regularly and get to use the high revving engine in the way its meant to be....but if you bought it just cas it says M on it, your really missing the point of such a good car.

 

[Breaker]

Out of interest. if you read most of the road tests by different magazines, they nearly all say that the 3.0si is the better car on the road. :wink: :fuelfire:

I have tested a Z4M Coupe a couple of times now, the second one for over 1/2 a day, and the differences still didn't jump out at me and say "buy me". If It had, I would have! :wink:

There were differences, and I liked the steering feel more at speed of the M, but I was a little disappointed in the performance difference to be honest. I was expecting more I guess. :?

 

[Breaker]

Actually, performance wise in a straight line, I would like to see one of those drag race videos that are posted on some sites (the ones on an airfield) between the Z4M and the Z4 3.0si. I keep looking on the net but haven't found one yet. I know the M would be faster but I'd be interested to see by how much.

 

[Hunter]

Out of interest. if you read most of the road tests by different magazines, they nearly all say that the 3.0si is the better car on the road. :wink: :fuelfire:

I have tested a Z4M Coupe a couple of times now, the second one for over 1/2 a day, and the differences still didn't jump out at me and say "buy me". If It had, I would have! :wink:

There were differences, and I liked the steering feel more at speed of the M, but I was a little disappointed in the performance difference to be honest. I was expecting more I guess. :?

There speaks the Voice of reason!!!!